Voting Behaviour:Rational vs Partisan Voting

When the behaviour of economic actors is considered (businesses, individuals and consumers) it can be seen that the way any decision is reached is by an entirely rational thought process. Firstly, the costs and benefits to take a particular action are assessed in order to maximise any advantages and naturally minimise the costs involved. This is the way that rational voters think, and whilst on one hand, strong partisans may be a constant and active supporter of their party, thus stabilising the electoral system, rational voters pay little attention to politics between elections and show interest only when the possibility that it may directly effect them arises. What is also of importance to point out here is that there is more incentive for the rational person to actually vote when it appears an election may be very close and the potential winners policies are highly preferable to the policies of the potential losing party . Thus voting, unlike the consistency of party identifiers, can be somewhat sporadic. This tendency to vote in close run elections highlights another difference between the alternative theories, that of importance of the individuals vote.

To raise an issue mentioned earlier, perhaps this is where retrospective voting plays a part. Retrospective voting can almost be seen as a perfect ‘mix’ of rational voting theory and party identification in that voters do not exactly decide anew at each election, but do develop a party identification, but one which is based upon a ‘running tally’ of retrospective, and rational evaluations, rather than emotional attachments. Thus this type of voter, probably more associated with rational choice than strong partisanship, could be described as a ‘fair-weather friend’ in that their vote depends upon performance rather than promises. This does differ from the ‘very strong’ party identifier as acknowledged in the theory of partisanship. For example, the British Labour party’s shift to the left in the 1980’s probably put off many rational voters, and indeed, retrospective voters who would have no experience of this new party approach to base a decision on . However, in theory it should not have put off strong party identifiers, as they would see their partisanship as a long-term affiliation, no matter what, whereas retrospective voting states that partisanship will change according to a rational choice made regarding party performance. At least party identification theory attempts to locate the values of the voter through socialisation and life experiences, something that rational theories do not attempt to do, and thus the values of the rational voter seem rather abstract.

On the other hand a more rational voter could be described as ‘instrumental’ as opposed to expressive. In this sense the voter sees their vote as a means to an end, a way of voting for the party they feel will benefit their lives to a larger extent. Whereas a person experiencing strong partisanship votes according to a strong sense of attachment and commitment, a rational voter is more likely to change party from election to election. For party identifiers it becomes ‘normal’ to vote for the party of their choice without any specific information, whilst the rational voter prefers to weigh up the ‘pros and cons’ of each election to make a more informed, and supposedly more beneficial, choice. Thus rational choice theory is in direct agreement with the concept of utilitarianism, based on the works of Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) , in that rational choice should result in political actors choosing the most efficient means to achieve their various ends. As Harrop and Miller state, there is no room in the rational choice model for people who vote for the sake of loyalty .

Party identification can easily be said is an entirely expressive way of voting. In this it is meant that voters are actively expressing support for a party often based on a lo

Some topics in this essay:
Liberal Democrat, British Labour, Party Identification, Daily Telegraph, President Bush, Harrop Miller, , Scottish Welsh, Duncan Smith, party identification, rational choice, Jeremy Bentham, rational voters, rational voter, party identifiers, rational choice theory, choice theory, voting behaviour, impact television, party identifier, retrospective voting, party identification rational, rational choice model, rational voting theory, party identification based,